簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表
研究生： 阮氏碧璃
Nguyen Thi Bich Ly
論文名稱： 利用系統動態模式評估與選擇供應商
Solving Supplier Evaluation and Selection Problem by using System Dynamics Model
指導教授： 王孔政
Kung-Jeng Wang
口試委員: 王敏
Min Wang
林承哲
Robert C.J. Lin
學位類別： 碩士
Master
系所名稱： 管理學院 - 工業管理系
Department of Industrial Management
論文出版年： 2018
畢業學年度： 106
語文別： 英文
論文頁數： 99
中文關鍵詞： 系統動態 、評選供應商 、業務模擬
外文關鍵詞： System dynamics, Supplier evaluation and selection, Business simulation
相關次數： 點閱：321  下載：8 
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報
  •  上一筆

    • 自1990 年代初期以來，台灣成為重要的製造代工王國之一，這些企業因生產效率、速度、靈活性及降低成本能力而快速成長並創造企業價值。但現今，隨著商業環境競爭加劇、製造代工需求易被取代、科技快速變化、成本降低不易，都使得台灣面臨代工困境的挑戰。面對這樣的情況，採購成為不可或缺的功能因素，它直接影響企業的成本結構、產品品質和競爭力。因此，在決策的過程中，了解供應商行為及這些行為對企業經營的影響，都是管理者評選供應商的重要決策工具。為了解決此問題，本研究開發一個系統動態(SD) 模型，以研究供應商行為對企業績效的影響，與如何進行供應商的評選。此模型乃根據台灣一家資訊通信技術公司的實際營運情況設計，其中包含五個內部子模型：訂單需求、生產控制、財務計劃、專案管理、研究發展，以及一個外部子模型：供應商管理。為確保模型之準確性，本研究採用結構與行為效度測試，一系列的實驗設計旨在研究供應商因素對企業利潤的影響。此外，此系統動態模型還加入18家housing材料供應商的過往數據資料，以進行供應商評選。研究結果證明，最有效的供應商生產組合可創造高於8%的利潤。

    Since the beginning of 1990s, Taiwan has been one of the most important OEM/ODM partners partner. These firms are valuable because of their production speed, flexibility, and cost-cutting ability. But nowadays, when business environment is getting more competitive; demand is uncertain; and technology is rapidly changing, the cost-cutting ability of OEM/ODM becomes more challenging than ever. In such situation, purchasing function, which directly effecting to cost structure, product quality, and competitive ability of enterprise, becomes an essential function. So, the understanding of supplier behaviors and effect of these behaviors on firm operation becomes an indispensable tool for managers for making adequate strategic decisions on supplier evaluation and selection. This research develops a system dynamics (SD) model to (i) investigate the effects of supplier’s behavior on a firm performance and (ii) to process supplier evaluation and selection work. A simulation model is designed based on actual operation of a Taiwan ICT firm, including five internal sub-models: order demand, production control, financial planning, project management, R&D, and an external sub-model: supplier management. In order to confirm the accuracy of simulation model, structural validity tests and behavior validity test are applied. A set of design of experiment (DOE) is designed to investigate the effect of supplier factors on profit outcome. Furthermore, historical data from 18 housing material suppliers are loaded into the proposed SD model to implement the supplier evaluation and selection process. Our study also proves that the combination of the most efficient suppliers produces a higher profit, approximately 8%, comparing to simulation result of 18 suppliers.

    TABLE OF CONTENT ACKNOWLEDGMENT I 摘要 II ABSTRACT III TABLE OF CONTENT IV FIGURE LISTS VII TABLE LISTS IX Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Research Background 1 1.2 Research Purpose and Scope 2 1.3 Research Procedures 3 Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 4 2.1 System Dynamics 4 2.2 Supplier Valuation 5 2.3 Summary of Literature Review 7 Chapter 3 MODELING OF A BUSINESS UNIT MODEL 8 3.1 The Conceptual Causal Loop of the Business Unit Model 8 3.2 Process Flow Design and Mathematical Model 10 3.2.1 Order Demand Sub-Model 12 3.2.2 Production Control Sub-Model 12 3.2.3 Financial Planning Sub-Model 13 3.2.4 Project Management Sub-Model 14 3.2.5 R&D Sub-Model 15 3.2.6 Supplier Management Sub-Model 16 3.3 Profile of the firm in case study 18 3.4 A Realization of Dashboard System 21 Chapter 4 EXPERIMENTS AND ANALYSIS 23 4.1 Model Validation 23 4.2 What-if Analysis for Supplier Factors 26 4.2.1 Supplier capacity 27 4.2.2 Material yield rate 28 4.2.3 Material unit cost 29 4.2.4 Payment term 30 4.3 R&D and Project Management Scenarios Analysis 31 4.4 Sensitive Analysis of Key Factors 32 4.5 Housing Suppliers Evaluation and Selection 36 4.5.1 Aluminum suppliers 37 4.5.2 Die casting suppliers 39 4.5.3 Keypad suppliers 41 4.5.4 Metal suppliers 43 4.5.5 Mim suppliers 45 4.5.6 Plastics suppliers 47 4.5.7 Combination of the most efficient suppliers 50 4.6 Summary of Experiments and Analysis 51 Chapter 5 CONCLUSION 53 5.1 Summary 53 5.2 Limitations 54 5.3 Suggestion for Future Research 55 REFERENCES 56 APPENDIXES 63

    Abdel-Hamid, T. K. (1984). The dynamics of software development project management: An integrative system dynamics perspective. Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
    Aghdaie, M. H. (2017). Data Mining Group Decision-Making with FAHP: An Application in Supplier Evaluation and Segmentation. In Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (pp. 99-124): Chapman and Hall/CRC.
    Akkermans, H., & Dellaert, N. (2005). The rediscovery of industrial dynamics: the contribution of system dynamics to supply chain management in a dynamic and fragmented world. System Dynamics Review, 21(3), 173-186.
    Angerhofer, B. J., & Angelides, M. C. (2000). System dynamics modelling in supply chain management: research review. Paper presented at the Simulation conference, 2000. proceedings. winter.
    Bali, S., & Amin, S. S. (2017). An analytical framework for supplier evaluation and selection: a multi-criteria decision making approach. International Journal of Advanced Operations Management, 9(1), 57-72.
    Barlas, Y. (1989). Multiple tests for validation of system dynamics type of simulation models. European Journal of Operational Research, 42(1), 59-87. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(89)90059-3
    Bayazit, O. (2006). Use of analytic network process in vendor selection decisions. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 13(5), 566-579.
    Birgün Barla, S. (2003). A case study of supplier selection for lean supply by using a mathematical model. Logistics Information Management, 16(6), 451-459.
    Chan, F. S. (2003). Interactive selection model for supplier selection process: an analytical hierarchy process approach. International Journal of Production Research, 41(15), 3549-3579.
    Chen, C.-T., Lin, C.-T., & Huang, S.-F. (2006). A fuzzy approach for supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain management. International journal of production economics, 102(2), 289-301.
    Choy, K., & Lee, W. (2002). A generic tool for the selection and management of supplier relationships in an outsourced manufacturing environment: the application of case based reasoning. Logistics Information Management, 15(4), 235-253.
    Ding, H., Benyoucef, L., & Xie, X. (2005). A simulation optimization methodology for supplier selection problem. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 18(2-3), 210-224.
    Florez-Lopez, R. (2007). Strategic supplier selection in the added-value perspective: A CI approach. Information Sciences, 177(5), 1169-1179.
    Forrester, J. W. (1997). Industrial Dynamics. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 48(10), 1037-1041. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600946
    Gencer, C., & Gürpinar, D. (2007). Analytic network process in supplier selection: A case study in an electronic firm. Applied mathematical modelling, 31(11), 2475-2486.
    Georgiadis, P., Vlachos, D., & Iakovou, E. (2005). A system dynamics modeling framework for the strategic supply chain management of food chains. Journal of food engineering, 70(3), 351-364.
    Ghodsypour, S. H., & O’brien, C. (2001). The total cost of logistics in supplier selection, under conditions of multiple sourcing, multiple criteria and capacity constraint. International journal of production economics, 73(1), 15-27.
    Goodman, M. R. (1997). Study notes in system dynamics. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 48(11), 1147-1147.
    Henk, A., Paul, B., & Bart, V. (1999). Virtuous and vicious cycles on the road towards international supply chain management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 19(5/6), 565-582. doi:doi:10.1108/01443579910260883
    Ho, W., Xu, X., & Dey, P. K. (2010). Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 202(1), 16-24. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2009.05.009
    Homer, J. B., & Hirsch, G. B. (2006). System dynamics modeling for public health: background and opportunities. American journal of public health, 96(3), 452-458.
    Hong, G. H., Park, S. C., Jang, D. S., & Rho, H. M. (2005). An effective supplier selection method for constructing a competitive supply-relationship. Expert Systems with Applications, 28(4), 629-639.
    Hou, J., & Su, D. (2007). EJB-MVC oriented supplier selection system for mass customization. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 18(1), 54-71.
    Hovmand, P. S. (2014). Community based system dynamics: Springer.
    Karpak, B., Kumcu, E., & Kasuganti, R. R. (2001). Purchasing materials in the supply chain: managing a multi-objective task. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 7(3), 209-216.
    KhanMohammadi, E., Talaie, H., Safari, H., & Salehzadeh, R. (2018). Supplier evaluation and selection for sustainable supply chain management under uncertainty conditions. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, 1-15.
    Kleijnen, J. P. (1995). Sensitivity analysis and optimization of system dynamics models: regression analysis and statistical design of experiments. System Dynamics Review, 11(4), 275-288.
    Lamaison, N., Ong, C. L., Marcinichen, J. B., & Thome, J. R. (2017). Two-phase mini-thermosyphon electronics cooling: Dynamic modeling, experimental validation and application to 2U servers. Applied Thermal Engineering, 110, 481-494.
    Lau, H., Nakandala, D., & Shum, P. K. (2018). A business process decision model for fresh-food supplier evaluation. Business Process Management Journal, 24(3), 716-744.
    Laura, B. F., & David, M. (2001). An analytical method for benchmarking best peer suppliers. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 21(1/2), 195-209. doi:doi:10.1108/01443570110358530
    Lewis, C. D. (1982). Industrial and business forecasting methods: A practical guide to exponential smoothing and curve fitting: Butterworth-Heinemann.
    Liu, F.-H. F., & Hai, H. L. (2005). The voting analytic hierarchy process method for selecting supplier. International journal of production economics, 97(3), 308-317.
    Lyneis, J. M. (1980). Corporate planning and policy design: A system dynamics approach: Mit Pr.
    Morecroft, J. (2018). Management attitudes, learning and scale in successful diversification: a dynamic and behavioural resource system view. In System Dynamics (pp. 69-106): Springer.
    Nazareth, D. L., & Choi, J. (2015). A system dynamics model for information security management. Information & Management, 52(1), 123-134.
    Ng, W. L. (2008). An efficient and simple model for multiple criteria supplier selection problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 186(3), 1059-1067.
    Niu, B., Wang, Y., & Guo, P. (2015). Equilibrium pricing sequence in a co-opetitive supply chain with the ODM as a downstream rival of its OEM. Omega, 57, 249-270.
    Ramakrishnan, R., & Karunamoorthy, L. (2006). Multi response optimization of wire EDM operations using robust design of experiments. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 29(1-2), 105-112.
    Saen, R. F. (2006). A decision model for selecting technology suppliers in the presence of nondiscretionary factors. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 181(2), 1609-1615.
    Saen, R. F. (2007). Suppliers selection in the presence of both cardinal and ordinal data. European Journal of Operational Research, 183(2), 741-747.
    Saha, P., & Tremaine, S. (1992). Symplectic integrators for solar system dynamics. The Astronomical Journal, 104, 1633-1640.
    Sahin, O., Stewart, R. A., & Porter, M. G. (2015). Water security through scarcity pricing and reverse osmosis: a system dynamics approach. Journal of cleaner production, 88, 160-171.
    Sarkis, J., & Talluri, S. (2002). A model for strategic supplier selection. Journal of supply chain management, 38(4), 18-28.
    Slootweg, J. G. (2003). Wind power: Modelling and impact on power system dynamics.
    Tako, A. A., & Robinson, S. (2012). The application of discrete event simulation and system dynamics in the logistics and supply chain context. Decision Support Systems, 52(4), 802-815. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2011.11.015
    Talluri, S., & Baker, R. (2002). A multi-phase mathematical programming approach for effective supply chain design. European Journal of Operational Research, 141(3), 544-558.
    Talluri, S., & Narasimhan, R. (2003). Vendor evaluation with performance variability: A max–min approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 146(3), 543-552.
    Talluri, S., & Narasimhan, R. (2005). A note on" A methodology for supply base optimization". IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 52(1), 130-139.
    Tian, Y., Govindan, K., & Zhu, Q. (2014). A system dynamics model based on evolutionary game theory for green supply chain management diffusion among Chinese manufacturers. Journal of cleaner production, 80, 96-105.
    Torres, J. P., Kunc, M., & O'Brien, F. (2017). Supporting strategy using system dynamics. European Journal of Operational Research, 260(3), 1081-1094.
    Towill, D. R. (1996). Industrial dynamics modelling of supply chains. International Journal of Physical distribution & logistics management, 26(2), 23-42.
    Vos, B., & Akkermans, H. (1996). Capturing the dynamics of facility allocation. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 16(11), 57-70.
    Wadhwa, V., & Ravindran, A. R. (2007). Vendor selection in outsourcing. Computers & operations research, 34(12), 3725-3737.
    Yan, N. (2011). Systems to provide data visualization and business process action in an on-demand enterprise dashboard. In: Google Patents.
    Yang, D. Y.-R., & Chen, Y.-C. (2013). The ODM model and co-evolution in the global notebook PC industry: evidence from Taiwan. Advances in Applied Sociology, 3(1), 69-78.
    Yu, C.-H., & Hsu, Y.-J. (2002). The dynamic relations between the world's leading computer companies and their corresponding OEM/ODM firms. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 19(4), 315-333.
    Zhao, R., & Zhong, S. (2015). Carbon labelling influences on consumers’ behaviour: a system dynamics approach. Ecological indicators, 51, 98-106.

    QR CODE